Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 566983
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T13:02:06+00:00 2026-05-13T13:02:06+00:00

I am trying to solve a simple linear equations system using LAPACK. I use

  • 0

I am trying to solve a simple linear equations system using LAPACK. I use dbsvg method which is optimised for banded matrices. I’ve obsereved a realy strange behaviour. When I fill the AT matrix this way:

for(i=0; i<DIM;i++) AB[0][i] = -1;
for(i=0; i<DIM;i++) AB[1][i] = 2;
for(i=0; i<DIM;i++) AB[2][i] = -1;
for(i=0; i<3; i++)
    for(j=0;j<DIM;j++) {
        AT[i*DIM+j]=AB[i][j];
    }

And call:

dgbsv_(&N, &KL, &KU, &NRHS, AT, &LDAB, myIpiv, x, &LDB, &INFO);

It works perfectly. However, when I do it this way:

for(i=0; i<DIM;i++) AT[i] = -1;
for(i=0; i<DIM;i++) AT[DIM+i] = 2;
for(i=0; i<DIM;i++) AT[2*DIM+i] = -1;

It results with a vector filled with NaN. Here are the declarations:

double AB[3][DIM], AT[3*DIM];
double x[DIM];
int myIpiv[DIM];
int N=DIM, KL=1, KU=1, NRHS=1, LDAB=DIM, LDB=DIM, INFO;

Any ideas?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 1 View
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T13:02:06+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 1:02 pm

    You’re not laying out the entries in the band storage properly; it was working before by a happy accident. The LAPACK docs say:

        On entry, the matrix A in band storage, in rows KL+1 to
        2*KL+KU+1; rows 1 to KL of the array need not be set.
        The j-th column of A is stored in the j-th column of the
        array AB as follows:
        AB(KL+KU+1+i-j,j) = A(i,j) for max(1,j-KU)<=i<=min(N,j+KL)
        On exit, details of the factorization: U is stored as an
        upper triangular band matrix with KL+KU superdiagonals in
        rows 1 to KL+KU+1, and the multipliers used during the
        factorization are stored in rows KL+KU+2 to 2*KL+KU+1.
        See below for further details.
    

    So if you want a tridiagonal matrix with 2 on the diagonal and -1 above and below, the layout should be:

     *  *  *  *  *  *  *  ...  *  *  *  *
     * -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1  ... -1 -1 -1 -1
     2  2  2  2  2  2  2  ...  2  2  2  2
    -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1  ... -1 -1 -1  *
    

    LDAB should be 4 in this case. Bear in mind that LAPACK uses a column-major layout, so the actual array should be look like this in memory:

    { *, *, 2.0, -1.0, *, -1.0, 2.0, -1.0, *, -1.0, 2.0, -1.0, ... }
    

    dgbsv was giving different results for the two identical arrays because it was reading off the ends of the arrays that you had laid out.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 370k
  • Answers 370k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Two ways to make it work. The right one Do… May 14, 2026 at 6:35 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer This will trigger on every click. Whilst I doubt this… May 14, 2026 at 6:35 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer The query is translated into something like this: SELECT *… May 14, 2026 at 6:35 pm

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.